Tony Andrews in his May 20, 2011 article in ProSoundWeb speaks about crushing audio levels and the distortion associated with them. Some of the things he mentions are interesting. How machines are made to be run conservatively, how distortion is unappealing and damaging are some of the things that caught my ear.
Andrews' idea of fidelity stems from the meaning of the word. He is talking about the degree of exactness in reproducing something, like sound. In his article he mentions signal integrity, overdriving inputs and outputs, and overdriving loudspeakers. It appears that he has experience with DJs, and other people who tend to desire unlimited system capacities. I too desire a system with unlimited capacity, but like Andrews desire limited distortion in the end sound.
With the ability to work speakers and amplifiers past their conservative operating levels, there will be people who do so. Andrews also talks about manufacturers lacking in their publishing of distortion figures at particular levels. This does not help people who buy equipment. The ability to change the point at which meters show the red LEDs may alleviate some distortion problems by tricking DJs or other users into thinking they are pushing a system to its limit when in reality it is in its conservative zone. If we want more level at the same distortion value, the only thing we can do is make the system bigger or find a system that is bigger with the same distortion value.
Self-regulation is another point that Andrews hints at in his article. This is very important to consider, because if we do not self regulate our industry, our industry will be regulated more by governments. In these cases, blanket legislation will impede the normal operation of speaker and amplifier equipment we all use. Susan Kelleher states it best when speaking about self-regulating the portable stage and tent business. With the publicity of stage collapses and the stage collapses themselves, the portable stage business makes itself vulnerable to government legislation regarding the operation of outside staging.
Horrendous sound is also a concern for Andrews. He makes a short note about fee-paying audiences in his article. I think it is important to highlight the part about fee-paying. It may be too easy to forget where the money to stay in business comes from. It does not often come from audiences who leave a show with a subconscious dislike for distortion or loud levels. It more often comes from audiences that consciously like and subconsciously like the whole entertainment experience. This includes, the atmosphere, the food, the talent, the beer, the temperature, the lighting, and the integrity of the sound signal. Andrews' point about fee-paying audiences matters to people in the business of sound.
What Andrews was talking about was not necessarily level so much as distortion. The desire for unlimited level with very limited distortion is understandable. If people can live with distortion and crushing levels, and people can make money doing it, then I will have to join them. If hearing damage, audio fidelity, and audience experiences get worse due to distortion something will change. I hope to be on the right side of the change if it comes.
http://www.prosoundweb.com/article/uncomfortable_audio_experiences_truths_about_sound_system_loudspeaker_disto
